welcome: please sign in

Diff for "Hardware"

Differences between revisions 24 and 72 (spanning 48 versions)
⇤ ← Revision 24 as of 2006-06-26 16:45:10 →
Size: 8681
Editor: JustinLeitgeb
Comment: Added another response from he.net re: switches.
← Revision 72 as of 2007-11-24 02:11:38 → ⇥
Size: 4893
Editor: RyanMikulovsky
Comment: fix image.
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
= New System Hardware = #pragma section-numbers off
Line 3: Line 3:
During the HCoop IRC meeting on June 24, 2006, the group decided that it would based it's new system architecture on the following pieces of hardware: This page collects information on the hardware that we have installed or plan to install at Peer1 as part of our hosting infrastructure. Some older discussion and similar stuff is on NewSystemHardwareArchive.
Line 5: Line 5:
 * Two robust servers, one that doesn't allow normal user logins, and one that does.
 * One switch to form a LAN between these servers.
 * One serial port device, to facilitate remote access to our servers.		 [[TableOfContents()]]
Line 9: Line 7:
Also, it was mentioned that we should research hardware support contracts from any vendor that will be selling us equipment. = deleuze: fileserver, static HTML content =
 * Donated by: Justin Leitgeb
 * Model: Dell PowerEdge 2850
 * Processor: 2 x 2.8 GHz Intel Xeon
 * RAM: 4 GB
 * Disks:
  * 4 x 10K Seagate Cheetah SCSI drives, 73GB '''and'''
  * 2 x 10K Seagate Cheetah SCSI drives, 36GB
 * Extra: RAID kit, with battery, etc., 256 MB RAID cache, 2 power supplies
 * [https://dcse.dell.com/selfstudy/Associates_7_0/Enterprise/PowerEdge/PE2850/printer_friendly.asp Maintenance Manual for the PE 2850]
'''Intended use: fileserver and host for all services that don't involve dynamic content provided by non-admins. No user logins.'''
Line 11: Line 19:
Additionally, group decided that the server that HCoop currently owns, Abulafia, will be brought to he.net for shell service. This will follow a necessary re-load of the OS software at a time to be determined later. = abulafia: shell server =
 * Processor: 1 x 900 MHz
 * RAM: 512 MB
 * Disks: 40 GB RAID 1 (2 x 40 GB 7200 RPM ATA drives)
 * Extra: 3Ware 6400 PCI ATA RAID controller
'''Intended use: refurbished slightly to serve as a generic shell server and the only machine where usage not strictly related to "Internet hosting" is permitted.'''
Line 13: Line 26:
This page will serve as a forum for collaborative research on the pieces of hardware that we need. = mire: dynamic web content =
http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/v20z/images/gallery/full/img_3.jpg
 * Donated by: Ray Racine
 * Model: Sun Fire v20z
 * Processor: 1 x 1.6GHz AMD64 (Opteron)
 * RAM: 1 GB
 * Disks: 2 x 36 GB Ultra320 SCSI (hot swap)
 * 1U
 * Ultra 320 SCSI controller embedded in mainboard
 * [http://www.sun.com/products-n-solutions/hardware/docs/Servers/Workgroup_Servers/Sun_Fire_V20z/index.html Product Documentation, including Maintenance and Troubleshooting Manuals for Sun Fire v20z]
Line 15: Line 37:
== Servers == '''Intended use: dynamic web content and any other Internet services that involve running arbitrary code from members (including custom daemons, etc.)'''
Line 17: Line 39:
We will be purchasing two servers, which will be configured and sent to he.net for colocation. = krunk: secondary KDC and AFS server =
 * KrunkInfoz
 * Donated by: Adam Megacz
 * Model: Sun Netra
 * Processor:
 * RAM:
 * Disks:
  * 2 x 200GB Unknown RPM and Manufacturer
'''Intended use: secondary KDC and AFS server (backup) in event that the primary server (deleuze) goes down'''
Line 19: Line 49:
=== Desired Features === = Other components =
Line 21: Line 51:
These servers should be as redundant as possible. At this point, we cannot afford to have less than one point of failure in many areas, so we should look for the following features in our new servers: == Switch ==
We are proceeding under the assumption that we'll use ShaunEmpie's donation (see HardwareDonations), a Nortel (Baystack) 380 switch. He says:
Line 23: Line 54:
 * Redundant power supplies.
 * Hardware RAID.
 * Dual CPU's, AMD seems to be a stronger option than Intel		 It is not brand new but is working. Here is [http://vpit.net/es380-guide.pdf a guide] that I was able to find to give anyone interested a more in depth view of it.
Line 27: Line 56:
==== Differences Between the Servers ==== VLAN Configuration Proposal:
Line 29: Line 58:
The admin-only server will hopefully be serving an AFS file system, which means that fancier kinds of RAID are justified there. The all-members server can get away with cheaper (and maybe even faster) solutions for local disk access. {{{
With our new setup, I think it would be best to setup a few different
VLANs for different uses. For anyone who is unfamiliar with the term, a
VLAN is a virtual lan. It allows you to have completely separate networks
on the same switch. This will allow us to setup a private network that
the public and peer1 would have no access to. This could be handy for
database systems, NAS, backup servers, etc which you'd want to keep off
the public network.
Proposed Configuration:
VLAN 1. Management VLAN - not used for normal traffic
VLAN 10. Public VLAN - public/Peer1's network
VLAN 20. Private VLAN - private subnet for inter-server traffic
For a starting point i think having ports 1-12 in VLAN 10 and ports 13-24
in VLAN 20 would be best. The VLAN membership of a port can be changed
easily so these would not be set in stone.
The switch allows for many more VLANs than we'll ever need so if anyone
has a suggestion or need for another VLAN it would be trivial to setup.
Any questions/comments, let me know.
-Shaun}}}
ES380 AC Power Specs:
Line 31: Line 79:
JustinLeitgeb thinks that perhaps RAID 1 would work on the all-members server, and either RAID 5 or RAID 10 on the admin server. It should be RAID 10 if we can afford it, or RAID 5 if we're shorter on cash. :)  * Input current: 1.5A to 100 AC
 * Input voltage (rms): 100 to 240 VAC at 47 to 63 Hz
 * Power consumption: 150 W
 * Thermal rating: 1000 BTU/hr maximum
Line 33: Line 84:
There may be other factors influencing different configuration choices between the servers. == Serial console ==
Some device to simulate local login over the Internet could be a life saver. JustinLeitgeb mentions a special card that Dell sells that would work with his donation.
Line 35: Line 87:
=== Proposed Models and Vendors === There are also some really good KVM-over-IP devices out there fairly cheap these days. My provider has one and it works very well, although on the client side you have to use this ugly Windows ActiveX control. I'm sure by now there are KVM-over-IP boxes that speak plain VNC. These should be well under $500. [AdamMegacz]
Line 37: Line 89:
Vendors: == IP KVM ==
The StarTech Server Remote Control External KVM over IP provides access to systems that may have a degraded network. It allows us to monitor Power-On Self Test (POST), configure BIOS/CMOS, and even reinstall operating system software. It must be connected to another multiple port KVM in order to have access to more than one server. See [http://www.startech.com/Data/ProductManuals/SV1110IPEXT.pdf?c=US manual].
Line 39: Line 92:
 * [http://www.penguincomputing.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=172&Itemid=230 Penguin Computing]
 * [http://www.dell.com/ Dell]
 * [http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=M&Category_Code=allracks Monarch Computer Systems]

Models:

 * Possible web server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_web_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_web_server.pdf (PDF)]
 * Possible admin server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_server.pdf (PDF)]
 * Possible web server from [http://www.dell.com/ Dell] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_web_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_web_server.pdf (PDF)], based on the Dell PowerEdge 1850.
 * Possible admin server from [http://www.dell.com/ Dell] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_admin_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/dell_admin_server.pdf (PDF)], based on the Dell PowerEdge 2850 (offers more space for hard disks in our primary file server).
 * Possible admin server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin], using the 2U server, redundant power supplies, and RAID 5 [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid5_server.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid5_server.pdf (PDF)]
 * Possible admin server configuration from [http://www.penguincomputing.com Penguin], using the 2U server, redundant power supplies, and RAID 10 [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid10_server_2200.ps (postscript)] [http://www.hcoop.net/~leitgebj/hcoop_servers/penguin_admin_raid10_server_2200.pdf (PDF)]

Note that when I checked Dell dropped something like $1200 off of the price of each server over $4000, so we should expect some significant discounts. Whichever company we plan on going with, we may be able to negotiate lower prices by emphasizing that we may buy more in the future, etc. With the Penguin models, we seem to have to go to the 2U, Altus 2200 in order to get a redundant power supply.

== Ethernet Switch ==

=== Desired Features ===

 * Gigabit
 * 5 ports minimum
 * Managed - so that we can troubleshoot failed NIC's easier
 * Rack-mountable, so that vibration and heat issues are diminished.
 * SNMP monitoring capability

=== Additional Information ===

He.net sent us the following when asked about switch configurations at their site:

''We've got customers using everything from ElCheapoSwitch(tm) to Cisco-grade equipment. The main difference between the two is how much traffic they can deal with, the number of packets they can deal with, and how they can be accesses/monitored. If you're looking at pushing primarily web traffic (<50Mb/s) and do not require any of the more advanced functionality of a managed switch, you could likely just go with a good unmanaged switch. If you were doing higher traffic levels, streaming, or other such traffic which consist of a zillion little packets, especially if it's between your servers, you would be better served by something a bit higher grade.''

And from another support rep at he.net (their responsiveness has been impressive so far!):

''Depends on their needs. If they want to run MRTG, then they need a managed
switch. If they just need a switch, a netgear or linksys or d-link will
accomplish the job.

Cost differences are greater managed versus non-managed. Non-managed can
be 50-$100, whereas managed can start at about $250 and go into the
$thousands depending on model and capabilities.''

=== Proposed Models and Vendors ===

==== Vendors ====

[http://newegg.com/ Newegg] has been recommended to several of us.

==== Models ====

===== NETGEAR GS108 10/100/1000Mbps =====

[http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833122111 Netgear GS108 Switch ]: Highly-rated Netgear switch that is not rack-mountable

Price: ($56.99)

MichaelOlson thinks that we should go with the Netgear switch. It has been rated as a very reliable product, and is very affordable.

I don't like this switch for the following reasons:

 1. It is not rack-mountable, meaning that it could raise issues for cooling in the rack, and be more susceptible to shock that could reduce reliability of the switch, or jar patch cables out of the ports.

 2. It is not managed, so we can't track important information about performance and possible NIC failures via SNMP.

Basically, I think that if we're going to pay all of this money for equipment and hosting, we shouldn't put an interconnect with insufficient features in the middle of our architecture. But, I'm not a networking expert, so I would welcome any opinions contrary to this! JustinLeitgeb

===== Level One GSW-1655 10/100/1000Mbps =====

 * ($249.99) Level One 16-port rack-mountable switch [[http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16833118021 link ]]

I've never heard of this brand (Level 1?) so I don't trust it. Any reviews? JustinLeitgeb

===== 3Com® SuperStack® 3 Switch 3812 =====

[http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=features&pathtype=purchase&sku=3C17401 3Com® SuperStack® 3 Switch 3812] seems to have most of the features that we need, with a bit of room to grow. Prices range from $1000 to $1500 on [http://froogle.google.com Froogle], in my experience [http://www.cdw.com CDW] is a reliable vendor. Perhaps we should make a jump and get the 24 port, which would support our use of an entire rack in the future, if the price difference is small?

I think that we should look for something in this range, but would welcome critiques -- I'm not a network tech! JustinLeitgeb


== Serial Port ==

=== Desired Features ===

Is this device really necessary? For an extra $1000 - $2000, and utilization of 1U, I am not convinced that this is worth the expense. It seems that in the rare event that our machine is inaccessible from ssh we can use remote hands with he.net and put our resources elsewhere. If someone does think that this is necessary, please put a link to specific models that would be helpful, and a list of reasons why they will come in handy that would justify the additional cost and space in our rack. JustinLeitgeb

=== Proposed Models and Vendors ===

[http://www.cyclades.com/ Cyclades] was mentioned as one vendor of serial port devices which are linux-friendly.		 == Standard KVM ==
We have a standard KVM to allow remote switching between servers as maintenance requires.

This page collects information on the hardware that we have installed or plan to install at Peer1 as part of our hosting infrastructure. Some older discussion and similar stuff is on NewSystemHardwareArchive.

TableOfContents()

deleuze: fileserver, static HTML content

Intended use: fileserver and host for all services that don't involve dynamic content provided by non-admins. No user logins.

abulafia: shell server

  • Processor: 1 x 900 MHz
  • RAM: 512 MB
  • Disks: 40 GB RAID 1 (2 x 40 GB 7200 RPM ATA drives)
  • Extra: 3Ware 6400 PCI ATA RAID controller

Intended use: refurbished slightly to serve as a generic shell server and the only machine where usage not strictly related to "Internet hosting" is permitted.

mire: dynamic web content

http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/v20z/images/gallery/full/img_3.jpg

Intended use: dynamic web content and any other Internet services that involve running arbitrary code from members (including custom daemons, etc.)

krunk: secondary KDC and AFS server

  • KrunkInfoz

  • Donated by: Adam Megacz
  • Model: Sun Netra
  • Processor:
  • RAM:
  • Disks:
    • 2 x 200GB Unknown RPM and Manufacturer

Intended use: secondary KDC and AFS server (backup) in event that the primary server (deleuze) goes down

Other components

Switch

We are proceeding under the assumption that we'll use ShaunEmpie's donation (see HardwareDonations), a Nortel (Baystack) 380 switch. He says:

It is not brand new but is working. Here is [http://vpit.net/es380-guide.pdf a guide] that I was able to find to give anyone interested a more in depth view of it.

VLAN Configuration Proposal: 

With our new setup, I think it would be best to setup a few different
VLANs for different uses.  For anyone who is unfamiliar with the term, a
VLAN is a virtual lan.  It allows you to have completely separate networks
on the same switch.  This will allow us to setup a private network that
the public and peer1 would have no access to.  This could be handy for
database systems, NAS, backup servers, etc which you'd want to keep off
the public network.
Proposed Configuration:
VLAN 1.     Management VLAN - not used for normal traffic
VLAN 10.    Public VLAN - public/Peer1's network
VLAN 20.    Private VLAN - private subnet for inter-server traffic
For a starting point i think having ports 1-12 in VLAN 10 and ports 13-24
in VLAN 20 would be best.  The VLAN membership of a port can be changed
easily so these would not be set in stone.
The switch allows for many more VLANs than we'll ever need so if anyone
has a suggestion or need for another VLAN it would be trivial to setup.
Any questions/comments, let me know.
-Shaun

ES380 AC Power Specs:

  • Input current: 1.5A to 100 AC
  • Input voltage (rms): 100 to 240 VAC at 47 to 63 Hz
  • Power consumption: 150 W
  • Thermal rating: 1000 BTU/hr maximum

Serial console

Some device to simulate local login over the Internet could be a life saver. JustinLeitgeb mentions a special card that Dell sells that would work with his donation.

There are also some really good KVM-over-IP devices out there fairly cheap these days. My provider has one and it works very well, although on the client side you have to use this ugly Windows ActiveX control. I'm sure by now there are KVM-over-IP boxes that speak plain VNC. These should be well under $500. [AdamMegacz]

IP KVM

The StarTech Server Remote Control External KVM over IP provides access to systems that may have a degraded network. It allows us to monitor Power-On Self Test (POST), configure BIOS/CMOS, and even reinstall operating system software. It must be connected to another multiple port KVM in order to have access to more than one server. See [http://www.startech.com/Data/ProductManuals/SV1110IPEXT.pdf?c=US manual].

Standard KVM

We have a standard KVM to allow remote switching between servers as maintenance requires.

Hardware (last edited 2021-04-17 15:58:03 by ClintonEbadi)